zeldafandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:LinkTheLefty
AuronKaizer (Talk) 07:10, March 8, 2012 For the record There are articles for the other versions of Ganon/Ganondorf. Gannon is just an unusual case because we use a different name rather than specifying which Ganon it is in the title. ''Xykeb Yvolix '' 10:21, August 19, 2012 (UTC) Edits Please refrain from making edit summaries such as this, wherein you imply you know how wiki articles should be than say, a much-esteemed, long-time rollback user, especially when another one gets involved as well. Whenever an edit is reverted by someone who knows what they're doing, please pay attention to what they say and try to learn from it, rather than pointing out how everyone else is "wrong." If this is going to be a continuing problem, may I suggest a different wiki altogether? --Auron'Kaizer ' 23:48, August 22, 2012 (UTC) :I normally do, but I have a severe dislike of the revert button. If someone is adding information, I assess whether or not it is pertinent to the topic and the wiki its based on, and if not then I modify the edit to suit it. Revert buttons are quick, but its use has a blatant disregard for the effort an individual has put into the article. It should be reserved for trolls and incoherence. Yes, I realize I added too much and basically made it a mini-walkthrough, and my immediate reaction is to address the revert's comment and work around it. Since my response came across as negative, I apologize for that. However, that does not justify a total loss of the overall edit - I am particular when it comes to grammar and flow. I also didn't continue to edit right after someone else stepped in - though I did see this message before I went back and made a more constructive summary explaining why precisely I am editing. There is only so much one can fit on a summary box, so it isn't easy to openly analyze every detail. Even if I am not here as often, I make worthwhile contributions to other wikis when I can, so I don't think I'll be migrating in spite of the minor quabble. LinkTheLefty (talk) 21:06, September 16, 2012 (UTC) :P.S. Right after I explain my position on my Zora Armor edit summaries twice just now, my edits are now reverted with no explanation. I honestly gave up on rewriting the article, but I feel the two things I still bothered to touch on represented repetitiveness and slight misinformation (which should be no-nos for any decent wiki). Like I said earlier, reverts are a major pet peeve of mine, especially if the response is irrelevant or simply not there. I've expressed my thoughts clearly on that article, so I feel at this point it's being reverted out of username recognition than any legitimate reason. At any rate, I no longer have the motivation to edit it. LinkTheLefty (talk) 21:29, September 16, 2012 (UTC) ::Perhaps if you didn't make your username so recognizable by continuous unsourced and unneeded edits, your username wouldn't be as recognizable. But you've put your username up to that and as such they are checked more than other edits. Speedruns are not a very reliable source, nor should they be called a source, really. The edit was reverted with good meaning. There's nothing left to say on that edit other than to stop with the continuous, at this point, insubordinate, edits. You could have started a talk page discussion but you have yet to do that. And just because reverts are a pet peeve for you, doesn't mean they shouldn't be used in times like this. – Jazzi (talk) 21:37, September 16, 2012 (UTC) :::At this point, you are the one that needs to stop. I've went on my position that I abandon the article, so at this point it feels downright silly to discuss this. Also, just because the technique is used in speed runs doesn't mean the normal player cannot skip the Zora Armor using basic in-game techniques. The simple fact is, the Zora Armor can be skipped in one of three in-game ways, without using Action Replay or GameShark (what have you). Your idea is that speed runs are hacking - it is not. I'm more referencing the alternate in-game method of reaching the Lakebed Temple and beating Morpheel / Zant, but it's easier to list speed runs since they're the ones you see doing it most often. I'm really not arguing for it anymore since it's been reverted after I list my piece. Like I said, I am done; if this particular wiki refuses to acknowledge outside the norm, that's its own problem and not mine. Again, removing some really minor wording saying that the Zora Armor is required is not detrimental, and I cannot imagine how that in any significant sense hurts the article. This tiniest of things compared to the earlier edits does not have to be over-analyzed. :::And really? My username is more recognizable because I naturally lost some of my cool after a revert? This has got to be one of the most inane reasons to keep watch for it. I'm not even on this wiki often, and you can even look at my edit history and find that this is really a small blip in comparison to other contributions. I don't think anyone likes to be reverted after taking some time to contribute based on the tools of fact and grammar. I suppose I could have opened a Talk Page, but saying I have yet to do that is pointless when I say I am over that article. Again, I gave up on rewriting the article much earlier, and my latest edits had sufficient input that I didn't feel needed to be recorded on the Talk Page since they really do go after minor points that irk me. There are better issues on this wiki to go after. LinkTheLefty (talk) 22:11, September 16, 2012 (UTC) :If you really want this conversation to stop, then stop commenting on it, since you're the only one partaking in it and you're wasting your time by responding since I've already moved onto something different. – Jazzi (talk) 22:20, September 16, 2012 (UTC) Stop Your edit warring has gone on long enough. You've been going about editing the Zora's Armor since August 21. If this doesn't stop, I will get an administrator to step in and talk to you. Additionally, speedruns aren't very accurate seeing as they normally involve some form of hacking the game. – Jazzi (talk) 21:08, September 16, 2012 (UTC) :Please see the above. I think you spoke way too soon. Do not label this as an edit war when I've compromised my edits until there is nothing left; I've only edited major portions then and minor portions now (each twice reverted). Also, speed runners and the techniques they use absolutely do not involve hacking. If it's an in-game exploit and it doesn't ruin the storyline, it should be treated as factual gameplay information and the removal of a small portion identifying it as mandatory does not detract from the article. That is how most wikis work. At any rate, I feel this whole thing was unnecessary and blown out of proportion. LinkTheLefty (talk) 21:43, September 16, 2012 (UTC)